Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Agenda: Flpma Turns 40, University Of Colorado Boulder. Getches-Wilkinson Center For Natural Resources, Energy, And The Environment
Agenda: Flpma Turns 40, University Of Colorado Boulder. Getches-Wilkinson Center For Natural Resources, Energy, And The Environment
FLPMA Turns 40 (October 21)
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) administers approximately 245 million acres of our public lands and yet, for most of our nation's history, these lands seemed largely destined to end up in private hands. Even when the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 ushered in an important era of better managing public grazing districts and "promoting the highest use of the public lands," such use of our public lands still was plainly considered temporary, "pending its final disposal." It was not until 1976 with the passage of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) that congress adopted a policy that …
Slides: Flpma In Its Historical Context, John D. Leshy
Slides: Flpma In Its Historical Context, John D. Leshy
FLPMA Turns 40 (October 21)
Presenter: John D. Leshy, Sunderland Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus, U.C. Hastings College of the Law
36 slides
This session traces the history of FLPMA including, among other things, its legislative, administrative, and historical antecedents, including for example, the Public Land Law Review Commission’s 1970 report, One Third of Our Nation’s Lands. It then considers FLPMA’s unique public lands policies and requirements and how they are reflected in the BLM’s management of public lands today.
See: https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/blm/history/contents.htm
Oregon Natural Desert Association V. Jewell, Jody D. Lowenstein
Oregon Natural Desert Association V. Jewell, Jody D. Lowenstein
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Oregon Natural Desert Association v. Jewell, the Ninth Circuit invalidated the BLM’s environmental review, finding that the agency based its approval of a wind-energy development on inaccurate scientific analysis. In negating the BLM’s action, the court held that flawed data and indefensible reasoning were discordant with NEPA’s central tenets. Furthermore, the court did not hold the BLM responsible for addressing a distinct environmental issue that was not brought to its attention during the public comment period.